#1086 "Crazy Eyes" Hamilton

I am helping someone separate duplicate stamps to create and preserve a concise collection. I was looking at two 1086 Hamiltons and did a quick check with a magnifying glass when I back tracked because one had an unsettling effect on me. The stare of the Hamilton looked cockeyed.

As can be seen on the first Hamilton of the picture that I have attached, the disfigured pupil in AH's right eye and the lack of delineation on his left iris give him this effect. The 2nd AH doesn't have the same appearance. When not magnified the 1st one is more appealing with richer color and contrast and it's kind of neat to know you have a cockeyed AH stamp even if it can't be seen without magnifying glass unless eyesight is good and you are looking for it. Does the value decrease dramatically if it is selected for removal? Should owner inform potential buyers if it is selected for removal? Is it due from too much ink? Federal Hall in both are comparable at least to my untrained eye. I actually think that I have been staring at these stamps too long because I am beginning to see all kinds of things that may or may not be really there!

I found out from the wonderful philatelic community that Hamilton's crazy eyes are not a different die or issue but just a run-of-the mill anomaly. It does not need different SC# designation. The owner can decide if he wants to keep "crazy eyes" or not without doing a disservice to the memory of a love one's collection!

The stamp on the left is a bit more heavily inked.

Here's such a variety on the left.

It does appear the inking was more pronounced but the Right eye (facing) on the left Hamilton has less ink and is lacking much of the delineation of iris and sclera. Recipient likes the crazy eye one best and is keeping it since saying crazy eyes is a reminder of a character in "Orange is the New Black". I am now onto covers and airmail. Recipient is wading backward from early 2000s yrs and is now in the 1980s. I was moving upward to the 1960s but quit. Doing covers and some airmail.

Here is what I noted at first glance

looks to me like it may qualify for its own cat #

It's just some extra ink, not a repeatable variety. So there is no basis for a catalog listing.

Hi GoingPostal,

I loved your indicators on the crazy eyed stamp. I noticed many of the same things and thought my mind was playing tricks and I was going mad or at least crazy-eyed (dot above the 7 is not part of stamp; dirt it came off). Thank you very much for letting me know it was not my imagination or eyes, especially the hair and facial differences!!!! FYI: I thought there was a difference between the two stamps on the right (facing) side of nostril down to mouth that you did not mark; maybe I was going a little crazy-eyed after all!

I had to quit looking at stamps. Thought I could help on a few modern Western Airletter stamps and it would not be a problem. I was wrong as a more recent post shows. Analytical persons who aren't committed to philately should definitely not look closely at stamps; especially when there is more than one of the same issue!

Thank you again!

revcollector,

I disagree that ear especially is clearly mishaped along with the top of d extended, touching letters and spike on hair on right side I think those would be from a damaged plate or something would that not qualify it for inclusion

Stampstumped,

I did note the dot on his nose but attributed that to weight of the ink on each stamp

Until you can find more examples with the exact same characteristics it remains an inking anomaly.